After many hours of research. I have compiled a master list of every prehistoric fauna to appear across the Jurassic Park franchise (films, books, comics, toys, video games, and as artwork or part of the dinopedia/glossary on the JP institute website).

What I did not include in the list were unidentifiable animals from the comics, cancelled toyline figures/video games, or animals that are only mentioned but do not show up on a population count/list or make any sort of physical appearance. Current nomina dubia that haven't been reclassified are placed in a separate section.

PachycephalosaurusPachydiscusPachyrhinosaurusParaceratherium (Indricotherium)ParalititanParanthodonParasaurolophusParasuchusParksosaurusPatagosaurusPelecanimimusPeloroplitesPeltephilusPentaceratopsPeteinosaurusPhorusrhacosPiatnitzkysaurusPikaiaPinacosaurusPisanosaurus (depicted as an ornithischian rather than a silesaurid.)PistosaurusPlatecarpusPlateosaurusPlatybelodonPlesiosaurusPliosaurusPlotosaurusPodokesaurusPoekilopleuronPolacanthusPostosuchusPrenocephalePrestosuchusPrionosuchusProbactrosaurusProceratosaurusProcompsognathusProcoptodonPrognathodonProsaurolophusProtarchaeopteryxProterogyrinusProtoceratopsProtosphyraenaProtostegaPsephodermaPsittacosaurusPteranodonPterodactylusPterodaustroPterygotusPtilodusPurussaurusPyroraptor

Is there any chance you can organize the animals under the sources they are from for all of them? I know it'd be tedious (and a lot more work!) but it would be helpful for organization reasons to put them under which sources they are from and alphabetically from that. It's a nice list though for starters.

Is there any chance you can organize the animals under the sources they are from for all of them? I know it'd be tedious (and a lot more work!) but it would be helpful for organization reasons to put them under which sources they are from and alphabetically from that. It's a nice list though for starters.

Not a problem actually. I had thoughts about doing something like that, but separating film-canon in one section and then non-film canon animals under their most recent appearance. This would be the easiest way to do it, since I already have a gallery of all the animals on a flash drive (which is essentially a mini-computer for me. Since I keep A LOT of different files for different things on it.) so I can work off that.

I don't plan on listing EVERY source, because that would be a lot harder because of all the material for the franchise. Which is why I think most recent appearance is the best way to put it.

Just a slight note, Proceratosaurus stems all the way back from the first film. It's seen as an embryo on the storage units and on the tour brochure map. I'll have to comb over this to verify everything else.

Also for the "taxidermy" animals in Lockwood's private Museum what's the source for him getting them from living animals? Museums do "dioramas" like that all the time with real and fake animals sculpted from a variety of materials. Dimetrodon, for example, is not known for any primary media and is present in games, toys, and comics for example. Absolutely nothing official has given any indication of InGen having a DNA sample of that.

Just a slight note, Proceratosaurus stems all the way back from the first film. It's seen as an embryo on the storage units and on the tour brochure map. I'll have to comb over this to verify everything else.

Also for the "taxidermy" animals in Lockwood's private Museum what's the source for him getting them from living animals? Museums do "dioramas" like that all the time with real and fake animals sculpted from a variety of materials. Dimetrodon, for example, is not known for any primary media and is present in games, toys, and comics for example. Absolutely nothing official has given any indication of InGen having a DNA sample of that.

EDIT: Moved all film-canon to that section, and broke down the JW:E and hybrids lists by letter so they weren't just a giant list.

The taxidermied animals came from an article from EW, explaining the concept art.

Quote: "This isn’t the Museum of Natural History but the private collection of Benjamin Lockwood (James Cromwell), John Hammond’s former InGen partner who has his own fascination with dinosaurs. Not only are there assembled skeletons, but Lockwood has stuffed dinosaurs as well. “J.A. chose a whole series of dinosaurs that you haven’t seen in the movie before — in any of the franchises before — and put them into dioramas and gave them each a little story,” Nicholson adds, before teasing, “This room is quite important in the film — quite a lot of things happen in there.”"

Last edited by 1morey on Fri Jul 13, 2018 5:49 am; edited 1 time in total

Interesting, as I've been working on a vaguely similar project, although I'd have to figure out a proper Excel spreadsheet before I did a public version, though you've moved considerably beyond that! Nice work.

I can see how someone would get the implication they're from once living prehistoric animals. I wouldn't say he confirmed they were from once living animals cloned outright though. It's not implicitly said, just that each animal in the diorama has their own story. You don't know if that means Lockwood favored said animal because he read about it as a school aged child or fell in love with it because Hammond and him played dinosaurs together.

It is a bit grandiose to presume they were taxidermy animals considering the cheaper alternative would be to make them out of resin or other material. I just don't see it as probably they were taxidermy considering that before the 80s the animals weren't cloned. They were bones and museum animatronics/static models.

I can see how someone would get the implication they're from once living prehistoric animals. I wouldn't say he confirmed they were from once living animals cloned outright though. It's not implicitly said, just that each animal in the diorama has their own story. You don't know if that means Lockwood favored said animal because he read about it as a school aged child or fell in love with it because Hammond and him played dinosaurs together.

Well, Mononykus and Concavenator are rather more recent. And I think it is pretty obvious (in filmmaking terms) that Concavenator was picked because it is a dinosaur from Spain, as a shoutout to J.A. Bayona.

I think the taxidermy makes sense in-universe, if in the early stages of Jurassic Park: San Diego, InGen was discovering new dinosaurs before their fossils were even dug up. Because if the amber extraction is any indicator, you're not going to know what you get until a specimen is hatched, so there was always a chance they would have ended up making their own discoveries. Since Hammond had paleontological teams working for him (such as Grant), they'd be able to coordinate the discoveries with the geneticists, even if the dig teams didn't know that they were working for a company that planned to showcase living dinosaurs.

This also has precedence with Suchomimus. Suchomimus was on InGen's 1994 list with 75% of its genome completed (with it being discovered in real-life in 1997 (and named the following year)). And I do not think the fact that Suchomimus was explicitly shown on the list was an accident.

Also, after reading through the Jurassic World Employee Handbook, I found some interesting tidbits:

islanublar.jurassicworld.com mentions they are not yet ready for exhibition.

In the Handbook, Owen makes a note to Claire saying that his Velociraptors are not attractions and are for his research only. He tells Claire that she should recommend the "other raptors on display" if guests want to see them. (It's left ambiguous as to whether he is referring to other Velociraptors on display, or to Deinonychus.)

This also leads into a very muddy area into the JP Velociraptors. We know they were modeled by the filmmakers (and Michael Crichton) after Deinonychus (as per Gregory S. Paul's grouping a bunch of dromeosaurs as Velociraptor). But they are far larger than a real Deinonychus (and a Velociraptor). As of 2001, Grant was still digging up specimens in Montana described as Velociraptor. Meanwhile, Jurassic World's website refers to the Velociraptors as being from Mongolia. So it would appear that the animals in the films are meant to be Velociraptor, but the gene-splicing has made them featherless and much larger than either Deinonychus or the real-life Velociraptor. This is further muddied as Deinonychus is showcased in Jurassic World (as it can be displayed on the Holoscape.)

So Jurassic World makes it clear that in the film universe, Velociraptor and Deinonychus are two distinct animals, and Paul's classification system is not used. While Grant seems to indicate that the specimens he is digging up are Velociraptors.

I'm left to believe that Grant uses an outdated classification system, but that seems a bit antithetical to how he comes across in the films. (Another theory is that Paul's system was used longer in the JP universe than in the real-world.)

I can see how someone would get the implication they're from once living prehistoric animals. I wouldn't say he confirmed they were from once living animals cloned outright though. It's not implicitly said, just that each animal in the diorama has their own story. You don't know if that means Lockwood favored said animal because he read about it as a school aged child or fell in love with it because Hammond and him played dinosaurs together.

Well, Mononykus and Concavenator are rather more recent. And I think it is pretty obvious (in filmmaking terms) that Concavenator was picked because it is a dinosaur from Spain, as a shoutout to J.A. Bayona.

I think the taxidermy makes sense in-universe, if in the early stages of Jurassic Park: San Diego, InGen was discovering new dinosaurs before their fossils were even dug up. Because if the amber extraction is any indicator, you're not going to know what you get until a specimen is hatched, so there was always a chance they would have ended up making their own discoveries. Since Hammond had paleontological teams working for him (such as Grant), they'd be able to coordinate the discoveries with the geneticists, even if the dig teams didn't know that they were working for a company that planned to showcase living dinosaurs.

This also has precedence with Suchomimus. Suchomimus was on InGen's 1994 list with 75% of its genome completed (with it being discovered in real-life in 1997 (and named the following year)). And I do not think the fact that Suchomimus was explicitly shown on the list was an accident.

I'm just going to touch on this right now seeing how I need to read up on the second thing you said from the other JW books. I haven't got them yet and so I want to be sure I can accurately state my impressions from them.

They're still taxidermy animals if even they aren't taken from the animal's lifeless corpse itself, but it is rather more of being a replica to scale more than anything else and museum display piece. There's a lot we don't know about the dinosaurs of Jurassic Park's universe. Discovery dates are something that could be insanely different or you know, Lockwood favoring the Concavenator after it was discovered and wanting it put in for his private museum or he funded the dig even. Again, there's a lot we don't know and we shouldn't really assume they're from the corpses of genetically recreated animals either given the fact that the science was under lock and key by InGen (and Henry Wu) for the better part of two decades with it finally going open source here in FK.

Update:* Added Nanosaurus, and placed Othnielia and Drinker as its junior synonyms.* Moved Deinosuchus to film canon as a DNA sample.* Added note that Pisanosaurus is incorrectly depicted as an ornithischian rather than silesaurid.* Added new JWTG hybrid: Mammotherium.